https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125948 A challenge to duty demand and penalty under the compounded levy scheme was entertained in appeal because the validity of the rules governing annual capacity determination under Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 raised a question of law. The appellate objection that the point had not been taken before the lower authorities was rejected. Applying binding precedent, the rules in force before Notification No. 42/98 were treated as ultra vires the enabling provision, so the duty demand founded on those rules could not be sustained. The impugned order was set aside and consequential relief followed. en-us Tue, 07 Oct 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 31 Oct 2012 17:50:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125948 A challenge to duty demand and penalty under the compounded levy scheme was entertained in appeal because the validity of the rules governing annual capacity determination under Section 3A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 raised a question of law. The appellate objection that the point had not been taken before the lower authorities was rejected. Applying binding precedent, the rules in force before Notification No. 42/98 were treated as ultra vires the enabling provision, so the duty demand founded on those rules could not be sustained. The impugned order was set aside and consequential relief followed. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 07 Oct 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=125948